British Waterways: Finance

Tim Farron: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what recent assessment he has made of the likely impact of budget reductions on British waterways.

Jonathan R Shaw: The formal comprehensive spending review settlement for 2008-09 to 2010-11 for Departments has been announced and will now be followed by DEFRA's own financial allocation process, during which the budget for British Waterways will be determined. The final allocations will not be known until the new year after further discussions with Ministers. The process of allocation will be based on careful prioritisation across the Department and all its sponsored bodies. We are engaging British Waterways in this and working with them to develop a long-term strategy which will maximise public benefits while delivering an affordable sustainable network within the total funding available.

Climate Change

James Paice: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs pursuant to the answer to the hon. Member for Oldham West and Royton of 12 November 2007,  Official Report, column 12W, on climate change, if he will clarify the information given in the tables; and if he will make a statement.

Phil Woolas: A detailed description of UK emissions estimates can be found in the 'UK Climate Change Programme: Annual Report to Parliament, 2007', as laid before Parliament by the Secretary of State in accordance with section 2 of the Climate Change and sustainable Energy Act 2006. Copies of the report can be found in the parliamentary Libraries.

Floods: Kent

Damian Green: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs which areas of Kent he has identified as particularly vulnerable to flooding; and if he will make a statement on future plans for flood defence spending in Kent.

Phil Woolas: The areas of Kent at the greatest risk of flooding are those within the low lying fringes of the coastline. Flooding from the sea has major consequences due mainly to the speed at which the flood can occur. Two thirds of the 71,000 people at risk of flooding in Kent are at risk from the sea.
	The Environment Agency is the principal operating authority with responsibility for flood risk management in England and uses long-term plans to identify the best way to reduce flood risk. These 100-year plans, developed with key partners, set out the schemes required. This year the Environment Agency is spending a capital budget of £18 million in Kent to reduce flood risk.
	Specific allocations for future years have not yet been set but spend for flood and coastal erosion risk management across all operating authorities will rise progressively from the current level of £600 million a year to £800 million in 2010-11. DEFRA funding will be directed to the most pressing problems on a national basis using a prioritisation system which reflects new Outcome Measures for the programme.

Floods: Repairs and Maintenance

Anne McIntosh: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs pursuant to the answer of 27 November 2007,  Official Report, column 141, on responsibility for repairing damage to infrastructure from flooding, who is responsible for the maintenance of and repairs to the infrastructure of drains following the summer floods in 2007.

Phil Woolas: I refer the hon. Member to the answer given on 12 November 2007,  Official Report, column 14W.

Sewers

Laurence Robertson: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs 
	(1)  what guidelines are issued by Ofwat on the design of foul sewage systems in respect of the frequency of storm events; and if he will make a statement;
	(2)  what discussions he has had with Ofwat on the design of foul sewage systems in respect of the frequency of storm events; and if he will make a statement.

Phil Woolas: Ofwat does not issue guidelines on the design of foul sewerage systems. This is a matter for individual water and sewerage companies. Design standards for developers constructing new sewers are produced by the water and sewerage industry itself.
	Foul sewerage systems do not carry storm water and are not therefore designed for frequency of storm events.
	Ofwat and local authorities will be represented on a steering group which will be assisting the Government in looking at build standards for future sewerage provision. This forms part of DEFRA's work on implementing the Government's decision to transfer private sewers and lateral drains draining to the public sewerage system into the ownership of the water and sewerage companies.

National Security

Paul Goodman: To ask the Secretary of State for Innovation, Universities and Skills pursuant to the statement of the Prime Minister of 14 November 2007,  Official Report, columns 667-72, on national security, when he plans to invite universities to lead the debate on academic freedom and associated issues as referred to by the Prime Minister.

Bill Rammell: As a first step, I undertook to engage with the university sector by setting out my views in a lecture given to the Fabians Society on 27 November. A copy of this lecture can be found on the website of the Department for Innovation, Universities and Skills. I am undertaking a number of visits to different universities to talk to students and staff about this issue as well as contact with sector bodies to encourage them to engage with and lead this debate. Academic freedom is one of the most powerful means at our disposal to challenge the views of violent extremists and to promote cohesive communities.

Students: Postgraduate Education

Frank Field: To ask the Secretary of State for Innovation, Universities and Skills how many and what proportion of post-graduate students at UK universities were from  (a) the UK,  (b) the EU and  (c) outside the EU in each of the last five years.

Bill Rammell: holding answer 22 November 2007
	The latest available information is shown in the following table. Figures for 2006-07 will be available in January 2008.
	
		
			  Postgraduate( 1)  students in UK higher education institutions, by home domicile, 2001-02 to 2005-06 
			  Home domicile:  2001-02  2002-03  2003-04  2004-05  2005-06 
			  Number  
			 UK 346,425 357,335 367,275 366,835 373,785 
			 EU 38,635 40,880 41,385 45,810 47,035 
			 Non EU 81,790 99,285 115,165 119,935 124,545 
			 Total 469,850 497,500 523,825 532,630 545,370 
			   
			  Percentage  
			 UK 74.4 71.8 70.1 68.9 68.5 
			 EU 8.2 8.2 7.9 8.6 8.6 
			 Non EU 17.4 20.0 22.0 22.5 22.8 
			 Total 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 
			 (1) Covers students on both taught and research courses.  Source: Higher Education Statistics Agency (HESA). Numbers are on a HESA Standard Registration population basis, and have been rounded to the nearest 5. Percentages may not sum to totals because of rounding.

Entry Clearances

Stewart Jackson: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department pursuant to the answer of 21 November 2007,  Official Report, column 948W, on entry clearances, what methodology will be used to identify the location of applicants for indefinite leave to remain in the United Kingdom; and if she will make a statement.

Liam Byrne: As explained in my response to the previous question on this matter, the agency is currently assessing what changes may be required to its data collection in order to make more tailored information available to its partners, including local authorities.
	Integral to this phase is defining what methodology the agency will use to collect the relevant data. Analysis on this matter has only just commenced and further work is required before a defined approach can be established.

Genetics: Databases

Ian Gibson: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what estimate she has made of the number of replicated profiles on the National DNA database; and how many of these are  (a) multiple profiles of the same individual under (i) different and (ii) the same names,  (b) identical twins or triplets and  (c) adventitious matches between different individuals.

Meg Hillier: It is estimated that at 31 October 2007 there were approximately 646,890 replicate profiles from individuals on the National DNA Database. If a crime scene profile matches replicate profiles from individuals, a match report showing all the apparent individuals matched will be sent to the force. Thus the presence of these replicate profiles does not impact on the effectiveness and integrity of the database. Nonetheless, a long term exercise is under way to identify issues associated with the removal of such redundant replicate profiles.
	Of the 646,890 replicates, 107,966 are due to upgrading samples from the SGM to the SGM Plus method of analysing DNA. When the NDNAD was set up in 1995, the SM profiling system was used which looked at six areas of DNA plus the area sowing the person's sex. In 1999 SGM was replaced by SGM Plus which looks at 10 areas of DNA plus the sex area. SGM has a one in 50 million chance of being incorrect, and SGM Plus has a better than one in 1,000 million chance of being incorrect, when applied to the general population, though they are less discriminating between individuals who are related, or if matched against partial profiles from crime scenes i.e. where the DNA found at the crime scene is too degraded to look at all the relevant areas of DNA. It was decided when SGM Plus was introduced that it was too costly to reanalyse all the samples taken between 1995 and 1999 to upgrade them from SGM to SGM Plus. However, if a match occurs involving an SGM profile, or a partial crime scene profile, the original samples are routinely reanalysed using SGM Plus to provide the best possible match. This may lead to the existence of both an SGM and an SGM Plus profile for the same person.
	The information requested on the number of multiple profiles of the same individuals under different and the same names is not available. However, since July 2004 the NDNAD Custodian's Data Quality and Integrity Team has been carrying out a programme to analyse replicate profiles of the SGM Plus type that are shown on two or more Police National Computer records. This work is in support of police operations and is not an exhaustive review of all replicates. It has revealed 3,752 pairs of false/dual identities on PNC where the owning force has now merged the PNC records, and 3,327 pairs of identical twins and five sets of identical triplets on the NDNAD. A marker is entered on the Police National Computer to alert officers to the existence of these twins or triplets.
	To date no adventitious matches between unrelated individuals have been discovered where the SGM Plus profiling system has been used.

Human Trafficking

Doug Henderson: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what assessment she has made of the effect of the introduction of the EU anti-trafficking hotline on the level of human trafficking.

Vernon Coaker: We foresee some difficulties with a proposed EU anti trafficking hotline, including issues relating to the management and dissemination of information received and language difficulties. The value of a hotline over and above national arrangements and existing structures would have to be demonstrated.

Ibrahim Moussawi

David Amess: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if she will deny entry to the UK to Ibrahim Moussawi; what recent representations she has received about this person; and if she will make a statement.

Liam Byrne: The Border and Immigration Agency are unable to comment on individual cases.

Departmental Correspondence

Sarah Teather: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport what percentage of inquiries received by his Department from the public were responded to within  (a) one week,  (b) 14 days,  (c) 28 days,  (d) two months and  (e) three months in the last period for which figures are available; and in what percentage of cases it took (i) over three months and (ii) over one year to respond.

Gerry Sutcliffe: DCMS takes very seriously its responsibility for responding to enquiries from members of the public. The Department does not hold the information requested in the format required, and to provide it in this format would incur disproportionate cost.
	For the period 1 January 2007 to 23 October 2007, 90.58 per cent. of our responses to members of the public (8,624 of 9,521 cases) were answered within 20 working days and we aim to answer as high a percentage as possible within a significantly shorter timeframe. Additionally, 74.35 per cent. of responses to letters from MPs and Peers were answered within 20 working days for the same time period.

Football: Schools

Helen Southworth: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport what recent discussions he has had with ministerial colleagues in the Department for Children, Schools and Families on football development in  (a) primary schools and ( b) secondary schools; and if he will make a statement.

Gerry Sutcliffe: On 21 November 2007, our Secretary of State and Kevin Brennan, Parliamentary Under-secretary of State at the DCSF, chaired a seminar with governing bodies and school sport associations, including the Football Association and the English Schools Football Association, to develop our plans to increase competitive sporting opportunities for children and young people and create world class junior competition structures in both schools and clubs.

Departmental Public Expenditure

Liam Fox: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence pursuant to the Winter Supplementary Estimates, HC 29, if he will break down the revised provision by subhead in  (a) near cash and  (b) non-cash terms.

Bob Ainsworth: The following table provides a breakdown of the Requests for Resources of the Ministry of Defence Winter Supplementary Estimates 2007-08 HC, by subhead showing all categories of expenditure.
	
		
			  TLB  Estimate type  Winter Supplementary Estimates (£000) 
			 Commander-in-Chief Fleet Resource DEL near cash 2,200,097 
			  Resource DEL non-cash 1,548 
			  Capital DEL near cash 44,054 
			  Total DEL 2,245,699 
			  AME near cash 0 
			  AME non cash 0 
			  Total AME 0 
			  Non Budget near cash 0 
			  Non Budget non cash 0 
			  Capital Non-Budget 0 
			  Total Non Budget 0 
			 Total Commander-in-Chief Fleet  2,245,699 
			
			 Commander-in-Chief Land Command Resource DEL near cash 5,857,744 
			  Resource DEL non-cash 12,667 
			  Capital DEL near cash 217,493 
			  Total DEL 6,087,904 
			  AME near cash 0 
			  AME non cash 0 
			  Total AME 0 
			  Non Budget near cash 0 
			  Non Budget non cash 0 
			  Capital Non-Budget 0 
			  Total Non Budget 0 
			 Total Commander-in-Chief Land Command  6,087,904 
			
			 Air Officer Commanding-in-Chief Air Command(1) Resource DEL near cash 2,702,476 
			  Resource DEL non-cash 2,353 
			  Capital DEL near cash 58,179 
			  Total DEL 2,763,008 
			  AME near cash 0 
			  AME non cash 0 
			  Total AME 0 
			  Non Budget near cash 0 
			  Non Budget non cash 0 
			  Capital Non-Budget 0 
			  Total Non Budget 0 
			 Total Air Officer Commanding-in-Chief RAF Strike Command  2,763,008 
			
			 Chief of Joint Operations Resource DEL near cash 407,833 
			  Resource DEL non-cash 3,239 
			  Capital DEL near cash 51,488 
			  Total DEL 462,560 
			  AME near cash 0 
			  AME non cash 3,599 
			  Total AME 3,599 
			  Non Budget near cash 0 
			  Non Budget non cash 0 
			  Capital Non-Budget 0 
			  Total Non Budget 0 
			 Total Chief of Joint Operations  466,159 
			
			 Adjutant-General Resource DEL near cash 774,189 
			  Resource DEL non-cash -92,230 
			  Capital DEL near cash 19,592 
			  Total DEL 701,551 
			  AME near cash 0 
			  AME non cash 0 
			  Total AME 0 
			  Non Budget near cash 9,314 
			  Non Budget non cash 0 
			  Capital Non-Budget 0 
			  Total Non Budget 9,314 
			 Total Adjutant-General  710,865 
			
			 Central Resource DEL near cash 2,138,516 
			  Resource DEL non-cash 132,053 
			  Capital DEL near cash -250 
			  Total DEL 2,270,319 
			  AME near cash 0 
			  AME non cash 3,899 
			  Total AME 3,899 
			  Non Budget near cash 750 
			  Non Budget non cash 0 
			  Capital Non-Budget 0 
			  Total Non Budget 750 
			 Total Central  2,274,968 
			
			 Science and Technology Resource DEL near cash 545,164 
			  Resource DEL non-cash -4,891 
			  Capital DEL near cash 0 
			  Total DEL 540,273 
			  AME near cash 0 
			  AME non cash 0 
			  Total AME 0 
			  Non Budget near cash 0 
			  Non Budget non cash 0 
			  Capital Non-Budget 0 
			  Total Non Budget 0 
			 Total Science and Technology  540,273 
			
			 Defence Estates Resource DEL near cash 1,038,281 
			  Resource DEL non-cash 1,562,269 
			  Capital DEL near cash -110,528 
			  Total DEL 2,490,022 
			  AME near cash 0 
			  AME non cash 0 
			  Total AME 0 
			  Non Budget near cash 3,141 
			  Non Budget non cash 0 
			  Capital Non-Budget 1,904 
			  Total Non Budget 5,045 
			 Total Defence Estates  2,495,067 
			
			 Defence Equipment and Support Resource DEL near cash 6,796,242 
			  Resource DEL non-cash 9,000,691 
			  Capital DEL near cash 6,858,527 
			  Total DEL 22,655,460 
			  AME near cash 0 
			  AME non cash 83,696 
			  Total AME 83,696 
			  Non Budget near cash -4 
			  Non Budget non cash 0 
			  Capital Non-Budget 0 
			  Total Non Budget -4 
			 Total Defence Equipment and Support  22,739,152 
			
			 Loans and grants Hydrographers Office Resource DEL near cash 0 
			  Resource DEL non-cash 0 
			  Capital DEL near cash -421 
			  Total DEL -421 
			  AME near cash 0 
			  AME non cash 0 
			  Total AME 0 
			  Non Budget near cash 0 
			  Non Budget non cash 0 
			  Capital Non-Budget 0 
			  Total Non Budget 0 
			 Total Loans and grants Hydrographers Office  -421 
			
			 Loans and grants DARA Resource DEL near cash 0 
			  Resource DEL non-cash 0 
			  Capital DEL near cash -55,812 
			  Total DEL -55,812 
			  AME near cash 0 
			  AME non cash 0 
			  Total AME 0 
			  Non Budget near cash 0 
			  Non Budget non cash 0 
			  Capital Non-Budget 0 
			  Total Non Budget 0 
			 Total Loans and grants DARA  -55,812 
			
			 Loans and grants ABRO Resource DEL near cash 0 
			  Resource DEL non-cash 0 
			  Capital DEL near cash -2,154 
			  Total DEL -2,154 
			  AME near cash 0 
			  AME non cash 0 
			  Total AME 0 
			  Non Budget near cash 0 
			  Non Budget non cash 0 
			  Capital Non-Budget 0 
			  Total Non Budget 0 
			 Total Loans and grants ABRO  -2,154 
			
			 Loans and grants Met Office Resource DEL near cash 0 
			  Resource DEL non-cash 0 
			  Capital DEL near cash 7,458 
			  Total DEL 7,458 
			  AME near cash 0 
			  AME non cash 0 
			  Total AME 0 
			  Non Budget near cash 0 
			  Non Budget non cash 0 
			  Capital Non-Budget 0 
			  Total Non Budget 0 
			 Total Loans and grants Met Office  7,458 
			
			 Total RfR1 Resource DEL near cash 22,460,542 
			  Resource DEL non-cash 10,617,699 
			  Capital DEL near cash 7,087,626 
			  Total DEL 40,165,867 
			  AME near cash 0 
			  AME non cash 91,194 
			  Total AME 91,194 
			  Non Budget near cash 13,201 
			  Non Budget non cash 0 
			  Capital Non-Budget 1,904 
			  Total Non Budget 15,105 
			 Total RfR1  40,272,166 
			
			  Conflict Prevention RfR2   
			 Programme Sub Saharan Africa Resource DEL near cash 29,063 
			  Resource DEL non-cash 0 
			  Capital DEL near cash 0 
			  Total DEL 29,063 
			  AME near cash 0 
			  AME non cash 0 
			  Total AME 0 
			  Non Budget near cash 0 
			  Non Budget non cash 0 
			  Capital Non-Budget 0 
			  Total Non Budget 0 
			 Programme Sub Saharan Africa  29,063 
			
			 Programme Rest of the World Resource DEL near cash 1,330,240 
			  Resource DEL non-cash 0 
			  Capital DEL near cash 604,000 
			  Total DEL 1,934,240 
			  AME near cash 0 
			  AME non cash 0 
			  Total AME 0 
			  Non Budget near cash 0 
			  Non Budget non cash 0 
			  Capital Non-Budget 0 
			  Total Non Budget 0 
			 Total Programme Rest of the World  1,934,240 
			
			 Total Conflict Prevention RfR2  1,963,303 
			
			  War Pensions and Benefits RfR3   
			 War Pensions Programme costs Resource DEL near cash 0 
			  Resource DEL non-cash 0 
			  Capital DEL near cash 0 
			  Total DEL 0 
			  AME near cash 1,026,482 
			  AME non cash 25 
			  Total AME 1,026,482 
			  Non Budget near cash 0 
			  Non Budget non cash 0 
			  Capital Non-Budget 0 
			  Total Non Budget 0 
			 Total War Pensions Programme costs  1,026,507 
			
			 War Pensions Programme costs, Far East Prisoners of War Resource DEL near cash 0 
			  Resource DEL non-cash 0 
			  Capital DEL near cash 0 
			  Total DEL 0 
			  AME near cash 500 
			  AME non cash 0 
			  Total AME 500 
			  Non Budget near cash 0 
			  Non Budget non cash 0 
			  Capital Non-Budget 0 
			  Total Non Budget 0 
			 Total War Pensions Programme costs, Far East Prisoners of War  500 
			
			 Total War Pension and Allowances  1,027,007 
			
			 MOD total  43,262,476 
			 (1) Commander-in-Chief Air Command was created from the former Strike and Personnel and Training Command TLBs.

Sentencing

Edward Garnier: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice how many people were sentenced to  (a) indeterminate sentences with a tariff of under 24 months and  (b) determinate sentences of over four years for (i) rape, (ii) attempted rape, (iii) sexual assault, (iv) other sexual offences, (v) grievous bodily harm and (vi) manslaughter in the last year for which figures are available.

David Hanson: All the information relates to 2005, the last year for which data was available.
	Data or the number of offenders serving an indeterminate sentence with a tariff of under 24 months is not available for 2005.
	In 2005 the number of offenders serving a determinate sentence of four years and over for the offences specified is given as follows:
	
		
			   Number 
			 (i) rape 582 
			 (ii) attempted rape 71 
			 (iii) sexual assault 104 
			 (iv) other sexual offences 303 
			 (v) grievous bodily harm 876 
			 (vi) manslaughter 148 
		
	
	These figures include those persons sentences to life and indeterminate sentences for public protection.

Young Offenders: Drugs

Stewart Jackson: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice what estimate he has made of the number of young people supervised under the auspices of the Youth Offending Teams who habitually use cannabis; and if he will make a statement.

David Hanson: Data is not collected centrally on the number of young people subject to YOT supervision who habitually use cannabis, so no estimate has been made.
	The YJB do collect data on the number of young people identified as requiring general substance misuse assessment and accessing early intervention and treatment services. These figures are set out in the following tables and will include young people identified as being users of cannabis.
	
		
			  Table 1: Young offenders reported as 'requiring' assessment, early intervention and treatment across England and Wales for the years 2004-05, 2005-06 and 2006-07 
			   Requiring assessment  Requiring early intervention (tier 2)  Requiring specialist treatment (tier 3 and 4) 
			 2004-05 17,524 8,224 3,327 
			 2005-06 15,414 9,141 4,293 
			 2006-07 14,448 8,230 5,029 
		
	
	
		
			  Table 2 : Young offenders reported as ' receiving ' assessment  within 10 days of screening, and receiving an intervention within 20 days of screening 
			   Receiving  assessment  Receiving  early intervention (tier 2)  Receiving  specialist treatment (tier 3 and 4) 
			 2004-05 12,885 7,672 2,973 
			 2005-06 13,150 8,786 4,088 
			 2006-07 13,375 7,915 4,823 
			  Note: Tiers 2, 3 and 4 refer to levels of service required for substance misuse issues of low, medium or high severity.

Departmental Data Protection

Philip Hammond: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government 
	(1)  what reviews have been undertaken of her Department's rules on data protection in the last two years; if she will place in the Library a copy of the report of the last review of her Department's compliance with data protection laws; and if  (a) her Department and  (b) her Department's agencies will undertake a review of their compliance with data protection laws;
	(2)  on how many occasions in  (a) her Department and  (b) its agencies' confidential data have been downloaded on to compact discs (i) without and (ii) with encryption in the last 12 month period for which figures are available; how many of those discs have been posted without using recorded or registered delivery; what procedures her Department has in place for the (A) transport, (B) exchange and (C) delivery of confidential or sensitive data; what records are kept of information held by her Department being sent outside the Department; what changes have been made to her Department's rules and procedures on data protection in the last two years; on how many occasions her Department's procedures and rules on data protection have been breached in the last five years; what those breaches were; what procedures her Department has in place on downloading confidential data on to computer discs before its transfer; what technical protections there are in her Department's computer systems to prevent access to information held on those systems which is not in accordance with departmental procedures; and if she will place in the Library a copy of each of her Department's rules and procedures on the protection of confidential data on individuals, businesses and other organisations;
	(3)  how many employees of each grade in her Department  (a) have access to confidential or sensitive data and  (b) are authorised to download such data to disc; how many of her Department's employees have undergone data protection training in the last 12 months; what the average length of time is that each employee of (i) her Department and (ii) her Department's agencies has spent on data protection training; how many investigations of employees of her Department for improperly accessing confidential information have taken place in the last 12 months; how many such investigations resulted in cases of disciplinary action; and what the circumstances of each of those cases were.

Parmjit Dhanda: I refer the hon. Member to the statement made by my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister on 21 November,  Official Report, column 1179 in which he announced a review to be carried out by the Cabinet Secretary and security experts across all Departments and agencies of their procedures for the storage and use of data. A statement on Departments' procedures will be made on completion of the review.

Jobcentre Plus

Julia Goldsworthy: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions 
	(1)  what steps are being taken to ensure that contact between people with mental health and learning difficulties and Jobcentre Plus is appropriately managed;
	(2)  what steps he is taking to make Jobcentre Plus more accessible to people who do not speak English as a first language;
	(3)  what progress has been made in improving the accessibility of Jobcentre Plus accessibility to elderly people; and if he will make a statement.

Caroline Flint: The administration of Jobcentre Plus is a matter for the chief executive of Jobcentre Plus, Lesley Strathie. I have asked her to provide the hon. Member with the information requested.
	 Letter from Lesley Strathie, dated 3 December 2007:
	The Secretary of State has asked me to reply to your questions about improving access to Jobcentre Plus services for people who are elderly or for whom English is not a first language and managing appropriately contact with people who have mental health or learning difficulties. These are things that fall within the responsibilities delegated to me as Chief Executive of Jobcentre Plus.
	Our services are delivered over the telephone, face to face, in writing and through the internet. We recognise that some people have particular needs linked to age, disability and language and strive to meet these in the delivery of our services.
	The steps we take are tailored to meet individual circumstances and include:
	working with customer advocates and intermediary organisations such as Citizens Advice;
	providing interpreter services to support interviews and telephone calls;
	using alternative interview venues; and
	producing a range of materials in other languages and alternative formats.
	Additionally, we provide targeted help for customers with particular needs. For example, our Disability Employment Advisers are experts at helping people with health conditions and disabilities into work, including people with mental health conditions or learning disabilities.
	Whilst some benefits end at State Pension Age, many of the services available through Jobcentre Plus to help people return to work have no upper age limit. This includes the use of Jobpoints to search for job and learning opportunities. Programmes like New Deal 50 plus, and Work Trials are among those available on a voluntary basis to people who have been in receipt of certain benefits for six months or more, including the Pension Credit which is a qualifying benefit for all currently available back to work programmes and services.
	Our staff receive training to ensure they understand equality legislation. We also work closely with the voluntary sector, including organisations that represent customer interests. This helps us to understand better our customers' needs and to make appropriate referrals to external support in local communities.
	I hope this is helpful.

New Deal for Disabled People

Mark Harper: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions 
	(1)  how many people registered for new deal for disabled people in each month since the programme began for the  (a) second and  (b) third time;
	(2)  how many people have registered for new deal for disabled people in each month since the programme began.

Caroline Flint: The requested information is in the following table:
	
		
			  New deal for disabled people 
			  Month of registration with new deal for disabled people  Total number of registrations  Number registering for the second time  Number registering for the third time 
			 July 2001 1,090 20 0 
			 August 2001 1,370 20 0 
			 September 2001 960 30 0 
			 October 2001 1,080 40 10 
			 November 2001 1,830 50 10 
			 December 2001 900 20 0 
			 
			 January 2002 1,450 30 0 
			 February 2002 2,040 70 0 
			 March 2002 2,640 80 10 
			 April 2002 2,550 80 0 
			 May 2002 3,250 130 10 
			 June 2002 2,170 100 10 
			 July 2002 2,580 90 10 
			 August 2002 3,010 150 20 
			 September 2002 2,860 150 10 
			 October 2002 2,990 140 10 
			 November 2002 3,400 220 20 
			 December 2002 1,480 120 10 
			 
			 January 2003 3,300 210 20 
			 February 2003 3,220 180 20 
			 March 2003 3,190 200 10 
			 April 2003 2,590 200 20 
			 May 2003 3,140 240 30 
			 June 2003 3,120 240 20 
			 July 2003 3,040 220 20 
			 August 2003 3,190 210 20 
			 September 2003 3,420 230 30 
			 October 2003 4,130 290 30 
			 November 2003 2,830 230 20 
			 December 2003 1,740 140 20 
			 
			 January 2004 3,390 260 40 
			 February 2004 3,700 270 30 
			 March 2004 3,980 340 40 
			 April 2004 4,670 440 60 
			 May 2004 4,670 440 50 
			 June 2004 4,640 460 70 
			 July 2004 6,570 640 100 
			 August 2004 4,900 410 60 
			 September 2004 5,280 470 70 
			 October 2004 6,650 660 100 
			 November 2004 5,000 550 80 
			 December 2004 3,630 410 70 
			 
			 January 2005 5,240 530 80 
			 February 2005 5,840 590 70 
			 March 2005 5,270 640 90 
			 April 2005 6,040 630 110 
			 May 2005 4,760 510 100 
			 June 2005 4,830 550 100 
			 July 2005 6,300 680 100 
			 August 2005 5,330 560 100 
			 September 2005 7,020 790 130 
			 October 2005 5,800 640 100 
			 November 2005 5,600 630 100 
			 December 2005 3,870 440 100 
			 
			 January 2006 6,140 800 130 
			 February 2006 7,060 840 160 
			 March 2006 7,810 980 180 
			 April 2006 4,880 640 140 
			 May 2006 4,950 710 120 
			 June 2006 6,210 840 130 
			 July 2006 4,830 610 100 
			 August 2006 5,070 600 100 
			 September 2006 6,310 770 140 
			 October 2006 4,970 570 120 
			 November 2006 4,760 590 110 
			 December 2006 3,550 440 80 
			 
			 January 2007 5,240 610 120 
			 February 2007 5,560 650 150 
			 March 2007 6,900 840 140 
			 April 2007 4,760 620 110 
			 May 2007 4,940 600 140 
			 June 2007 6,230 780 150 
			 July 2007 5,010 630 120 
			 August 2007 4,950 490 100 
			  Notes: 1. The New Deal for Disabled People programme was introduced in July 2001. 2. Latest data is to August 2007. 3. Figures are rounded to the nearest 10.  Source:  Information Directorate, Department for Work and Pensions.

New Deal For Young People: Peterborough

Stewart Jackson: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what percentage of participants in the new deal for young people in the Peterborough city council unitary authority area were repeat participants in the last year for which figures are available.

Caroline Flint: New deal for young people (NDYP) has helped 2,230 people in the Peterborough city council local authority area into work since it started in January 1998. Between June 2006 and May 2007, there were 960 participants on NDYP in the Peterborough city council local authority area, of which 290 (30 per cent.) were repeat participants.
	 Notes:
	1. Latest available data is to May 2007.
	2. Figures are rounded to the nearest 10.
	3. Percentages are rounded to the nearest number.

Energy: Fees and Charges

Helen Southworth: To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform if he will take steps to ensure that all customers of an energy supplier have access to the cheapest tariff provided by that supplier.

Malcolm Wicks: In respect of gas and electricity, each supplier has a range of tariffs which are generally related to payment method. While these will be available to all customers, there will be circumstances where a customer cannot access a particular tariff, for instance, an internet-based tariff or, where a customer is repaying debt through a prepayment meter. Most suppliers now offer social tariffs to their fuel poor customers, while others offer a range of measures designed to assist these customers. Among other things, these activities help low-income households reduce their energy costs. I am in continued discussion with suppliers to encourage them to maintain and build on these activities.
	Ofgem and Energywatch have undertaken activities to inform consumers about the range of tariffs available and the benefits of switching. A number of intermediaries now also exist to inform customers about different tariffs and provide an easy means of switching. In respect of the cheaper tariffs that are available through direct debit, the key is access to a bank account. The Government are tackling this through its work on financial inclusion and specifically work with the banking sector to improve access to bank accounts.

Heating: Conservation

Gregory Barker: To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform when he expects to develop a strategy on heat as indicated in the Energy White Paper; and what the timetable is for its production.

Malcolm Wicks: As announced by the Prime Minister on 19 November, a call for evidence on heat will be published in January 2008. following this, Ministers will look at options and a timetable for developing a heat strategy.

Productivity

Mark Lancaster: To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform what productivity per worker is in the UK; what information his Department holds on equivalent figures for  (a) the USA,  (b) Germany,  (c) France,  (d) China and  (e) India; and if he will make a statement.

Stephen Timms: The Government have a long running PSA objective to raise productivity growth over the cycle and in comparison to our main international competitors (the US, France and Germany).
	Latest international comparisons of productivity per worker produced by the ONS for 2006 show the gap with France currently stands at around 9 per cent. down from 23 per cent. in 1995. The data also shows that productivity in the UK is 4 per cent. higher than in Germany from being 10 per cent. lower in 1995. The gap with the US stands at around 23 per cent. down from 29 per cent. in 1995.
	ONS does not produce data on the productivity performance of India and China. However, GDP per capita data suggests that productivity performance is significantly below that in the UK.

Bullying: Internet

Ann Coffey: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families what recent estimate he has made of the incidence of bullying of children  (a) via the internet and  (b) by mobile phone text messaging.

Kevin Brennan: holding answer 27 November 2007
	We are unable to provide definitive figures for numbers of bullying incidents at school as we do not collect this data centrally. However our recent guidance on cyberbullying, incorporated as part of our comprehensive anti-bullying guidance "Safe to Learn: embedding anti-bullying work in schools", included a range of survey evidence on the extent of cyberbullying. This is summarised as follows:
	Research carried out for the Anti-Bullying Alliance by Goldsmiths College found that 22 per cent. of 11 to 16-year-olds had been a victim of cyberbullying;
	The MSN cyberbullying report (2006) found that 11 per cent. of UK teens had experienced cyberbullying;
	Noret and River's four year study on bullying (2007) found that 15 per cent. of the 11,227 children surveyed had received nasty or aggressive texts and e-mails, and demonstrated a year on year increase in the number of children who are bullied using new technology;
	Research conducted as part of the DCSF cyberbullying information campaign found that 34 per cent. of 12 to 15-year-olds reported having been cyberbullied.

Children: Abuse

Tim Loughton: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families 
	(1)  how many children who were referred for an initial assessment from social services were suspected to be in danger of  (a) abuse and  (b) neglect in the latest period for which figures are available;
	(2)  how many children  (a) received a core assessment from social services and  (b) had further contact with social services as a result of their core assessment in the latest period for which figures are available;
	(3)  how many children were  (a) referred for an initial assessment from social services and  (b) received an initial assessment from social services in each of the last five years;
	(4)  what proportion of core assessments for children referred to children's social care were completed within the target timescale of 35 working days from the day of the initial assessment in the latest period for which figures are available.

Kevin Brennan: The available information can be found in SFR28/2007 Referrals, Assessments and Children and Young People who are the subject of a Child Protection Plan or are on Child Protection Registers at http://www.dfes.gov.uk/rsgateway/DB/SFR/s000742/index.shtml on the Department's website. The answer to question 170799 can be found in table E, the other available answers are in table A. The department does not hold information on the number of children who had further contact with social services as a result of their core assessment (PQ170800 part b).
	
		
			  Table A: Referrals of children and young people to children's social care services, and assessments completed  Years ending 31 March 2003 to 2007  Coverage: England 
			   Number  Percentage 
			   2003  2004  2005  2006  2007  2003  2004  2005  2006  2007 
			  Referrals of children to children's social care services( 1)   
			 All referrals during year 570,200 572,700 552,000 569,300 545,000 100 100 100 100 100 
			  of which:   
			 Referrals within 12 months of a previous referral(2) 125,900 127,400 121,800 132,500 123,900 22 22 22 23 23 
			 Initial assessments completed in the year(1)   
			 All initial assessments completed in the year 263,900 290,800 290,300 300,200 305,000 100 100 100 100 100 
			  of which:   
			 Initial assessments completed within 7 working days of referral 149,400 169,100 179,200 194,900 208,700 57 58 62 65 68 
			 Initial assessments completed in year as a percentage of all referrals in year — — — — — 46 51 53 53 56 
			  Core assessments completed in the year( 1)   
			 Total number of core assessments completed in the year 55,700 63,600 74,100 84,800 93,400 100 100 100 100 100 
			  of which:   
			 Core assessments completed within 35 working days of initial assessments(3) 31,000 39,400 49,700 63,100 73,300 56 62 67 74 78 
			 (1) Figures for referrals, initial assessments and core assessments include unborn children. (2) Re-referrals relate to a previous referral to the same authority only. (3) Or within 35 working days of the trigger event where this was not an initial assessment. Indicator C 64 of the Performance Assessment Framework: The proportion of core assessments that were completed within 35 working days of their commencement.  Source:  CPR3 
		
	
	
		
			  Table E: Children who became the subject of a Child Protection Plan (CPP)1 , by category of abuse  Years ending 31 March 2003 to 2007  Coverage: England 
			   Number  Percentage 
			  Category of abuse  2003  2004  2005  2006  2007  2003  2004  2005  2006  2007 
			 Neglect 11,700 12,600 13,200 13,700 14,800 39 41 43 43 44 
			 Physical abuse 5,700 5,800 5,500 5,100 5,100 19 19 18 16 15 
			 Sexual abuse 3,000 2,800 2,700 2,600 2,500 10 9 9 8 7 
			 Emotional abuse 5,400 5,700 5,700 6,700 7,800 18 18 19 21 23 
			 Mixed / not recommended by 'Working Together(') 4,400 4,300 3,700 3,300 3,200 15 14 12 11 10 
			 (1) Where a child was made the subject of a child protection plan (registered) more than once in the year within the same authority, each registration has been counted. These include unborn children.  Source:  CPR3

Children: Databases

James Brokenshire: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families how many officials in  (a) his Department and  (b) other Departments and Government agencies are eligible to have access to the entire content of the ContactPoint database.

Kevin Brennan: No officials from the Department will have access to records held on ContactPoint. Once ContactPoint is deployed, local authority data controllers will have responsibility for the accuracy of records of children and young people ordinarily resident in their areas. Government Departments, local authorities and agencies—for example the NHS, the Child Exploitation and Online Protection centre (CEOP), and the Children and Family Court Advisory and Support Service (CAFCASS)—whose staff are responsible for safeguarding children and ensuring their well-being, and who need to use ContactPoint as part of their job, will be able to access and amend child records for children with whom they are working. The significant majority of users will be children's services practitioners, not government officials.
	We have contracted with Capgemini for the purposes of operating the national system, maintaining data quality and technical system support. The computer system will be in a secure location, physically removed from the Department.
	There are a number of tests that must be carried out prior to the deployment of ContactPoint in respect of data management, user acceptance, and security which will involve a small number of local authority data managers and data specialists from within the ContactPoint project.
	Everyone involved in the tests will be subject to an enhanced Criminal Records Bureau check before they access any live data. The majority of these tests will be carried out using 'synthetic' test data. Where live data is used, the tests will be carried out in a physically isolated, secure test environment.
	Access to ContactPoint will be strictly limited to those who need it to do their job. The number of users is estimated to be around 330,000 and will include small teams of data administrators in each local authority area and practitioners from education, Connexions, health, social care, youth offending services, police and the voluntary sector. These persons are clearly specified in regulation 9 and schedule 3 of the Children Act 2004 Information Database (England) Regulations 2007, and will be able to access individual records after providing a legitimate reason to do so, but will not be able to view or download the entire database.

Children: Databases

Tim Loughton: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families 
	(1)  what account he plans to take of the findings of the Making ContactPoint work initiative conducted by the Children's Rights Director for England in the development of ContactPoint;
	(2)  if he will review the number of people to whom his Department will make the details stored on ContactPoint available with a view to reducing risks of deliberate and inadvertent misuse of personal data;
	(3)  if he will reduce the number of children on whom ContactPoint will store information;
	(4)  what discussions his Department has had on access to ContactPoint since 15 November 2007.

Kevin Brennan: We welcome the report 'Making ContactPoint Work', published last week by the Children's Rights Director for England, Roger Morgan. In fact, my Department specifically requested Roger Morgan to ask children what they thought of the proposals set out in draft Government guidance about ContactPoint. We acknowledge fully and understand that children and young people quite reasonably want reassurances about security and access.
	The views of children and young people are central to the development of ContactPoint. In fact, 'Making ContactPoint Work', representing the views of 62 children, is a small part of the overall consultation DCSF has undertaken with children and young people. More than 1,000 children have already been consulted about ContactPoint and overall findings have shown that, once young people understand what ContactPoint is, they usually agree it is a positive thing. The views and issues they raise have played, and continue to play, an important role in the development of ContactPoint. Further consultation with young people and parents and carers is planned.
	Access to ContactPoint will be limited strictly to those who need it to do their job (currently estimated at around 330,000 practitioners). All users will be subject to stringent security controls and, before being granted access, must have completed mandatory face-to-face training, have obtained security clearance (including enhanced Criminal Records Bureau clearance) and have a user name, a password, a PIN and a security token to control their access to ContactPoint. Mandatory face-to-face training will include the safe and secure use of ContactPoint and the importance of compliance with the Data Protection Act 1998 and Human Rights Act 1998.
	To gain access to a child's record, all users will have to state clear reasons why they are accessing ContactPoint. All use of the system will be monitored and audited and every access to a child's record will be detailed in the ContactPoint audit trail. This will be regularly monitored by local authorities, using online User Activity Reports, to ensure that any misuse is detected and that appropriate action is taken.
	ContactPoint will include all children in England because it is not possible to predict accurately, in advance, which children will need additional services. Any child or young person could require the support of additional services at any time in their childhood. We want to support early intervention for children to help prevent situations becoming critical.
	Officials at the DCSF were briefed, on 20 November, by Treasury colleagues about the loss of the data at the HMRC. DCSF Ministers have been kept closely informed about how the issue is being dealt with at HMRC and the other agencies involved.
	As soon as we were aware of the issue, we made contact with the Serious Organised Crime Agency, the Child Exploitation and Online Protection Centre and HM Treasury to identify any potential children's welfare issues. As child safety and welfare issues are an absolute priority for us, we are maintaining close contact with the agencies involved to ensure that we all remain vigilant to any child welfare issues that may arise.
	On Tuesday 20 November, my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Children Schools and Families, asked the Department's Permanent Secretary to conduct an immediate assessment of how personal data is stored and protected in the Department. The Permanent Secretary reported back within 24 hours to confirm the Department is confident that we have very robust procedures in place. In light of the security breach at the HMRC, we are continuing to check our procedures to ensure standards are as high as they can be. On Wednesday 21 November, the Prime Minister confirmed this approach when he asked all Departments to check their procedures for the storage and use of data. Given the obvious importance of ensuring that ContactPoint has extremely robust security measures in place, the Secretary of State, also on Tuesday 20 November, asked for an independent assessment of its security procedures, which will be conducted by Deloitte.

Children: Day Care

Diane Abbott: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families what child care provisions are available for refugee and asylum-seeking women who are taking English for speakers of other languages classes; and if he will make a statement.

Caroline Flint: I have been asked to reply.
	It is up to local authorities to ensure there are sufficient child care places available to meet local demand. They receive funding from the Department for Children, Schools and Families which can be used to secure sufficient child care in line with local needs.
	Subject to their individual circumstances, refugees have access to the full range of benefits and services provided by the Department for Work and Pensions. This includes Jobcentre Plus customers on New Deal for Lone Parents or New Deal for Partners, who can access child care to allow them to participate in the provision. This includes English for speakers of other languages (ESOL) training.
	More generally, ESOL classes are provided by the Learning and Skills Council. Attendance for ESOL training is voluntary and while attending such courses, there are a number of ways that learners can access child care provision. DWP' Employability Skills Programme learners in receipt of jobseeker's allowance and undertaking a programme of a minimum of 20 hours per week are eligible for help with child care costs. The discretionary Learner Support Fund allocated to providers by the Learning and Skills Council can be used to support child care costs for learners aged 20 and above. Some local European Social Funding allocations can also be used to support child care costs. This varies from project to project depending on the scope and purpose of the project. In addition to this, learning undertaken by parents through Family Literacy, Language and Numeracy can also offer child care provision in some places. This support is not mandatory but informal arrangements are made by a number of providers.
	None of the funding available from Department for Work and Pensions or the Learning and Skills Council is available to asylum seekers; The Border and Immigration Agency (BIA) provide support to asylum seekers, and their dependants, who are destitute or likely to become destitute in the immediate future. No specific child care provision for asylum-seeking women who are taking English for speakers of other languages classes is given.

Children: Disability Aids

Mark Harper: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families what discussions he has had with Ministerial colleagues on the provision of alternative and augmentative communication equipment aids for children with disabilities.

Jim Knight: The Government recently launched the Bercow Review, which is an independent review of speech and language provision, led by John Bercow MP and supported by officials from the Department for Children Schools and Families (DCSF) and the Department of Health (DH). One of the specific issues to be considered by the review will be the effective provision of assistive and augmentative communication (AAC) technology.
	The review is currently seeking evidence from all interested groups and individuals, including through a focus group facilitated by Scope which will consider the provision of alternative and augmentative communication equipment aids. The Government will respond to the Review's findings and recommendations following publication of the final report in July 2008.
	Also, the Department of Health are leading on a review on community equipment, launched together with the wheelchair services review in June 2006. On completion of the review, the Government plan to deliver a radical reform of community equipment, with full consideration of and provision for the needs of children. On completion of the community equipment review, my Department will work closely with the Department of Health to assist in the implementation of the recommendations.

Education: Cost Efficiency

Philip Hammond: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families how much of the planned efficiency savings under the Spending Review 2004 are expected to be generated by  (a) Using Cover Supervisors, listed as element A1(b) on page 7,  (b) Pay Restructuring, listed as element A1(c) on page 7 and  (c) Modernisation of the Teachers Pension Scheme, listed as element A1(d) on page 8 of the departmental Efficiency Technical Note of April 2006.

Jim Knight: I refer the right hon. Gentleman to the answer given on 26 November 2007,  Official  R eport, column 267W, to the hon. Member for Twickenham (Dr. Cable). Details of DCSF's progress towards our Gershon target will be reported in the Department's Autumn Performance Report. This will be published on 7 December 2007.

Higher Education

David Amess: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families how many and what proportion of 16-year olds went on to  (a) A levels,  (b) further education,  (c) other vocational training and  (d) higher education in (i) Southend and (ii) each local authority in Essex in each of the last two years for which figures are available.

Jim Knight: The following tables show the proportion of all academic age 16-year-olds participating in maintained schools, independent schools, sixth form colleges, other further education institutions and work based learning. The figures are provided for Southend-on-Sea, Essex and Thurrock for 2004 and 2005, the last two years for which figures are available. Participation by local authority is not broken down by the qualifications being studied.
	Participation of 16-year-olds in education and training is published in the Statistical First Release: Participation in Education, Training and Employment by 16-18 Year Olds in England: 2005 and 2006 and Participation in Education and Training by 16 and 17 Year Olds in each Local Area in England: 2004 and 2005, please see the following link:
	http://www.dfees.gov.uk/rsgateway/DB/SFR/s000734/index.shtml
	
		
			  Table 1: Participation in education and training of 16 yea r olds by LEAs in Essex, 2005, f ull-time education 
			  Percentage  of 16-year olds 
			   Maintained schools( 1)  Independent schools( 2)  Sixth form college  Other FE( 3)  Total  WBL  Part-time education  Total education and WBL( 4) 
			 Essex 30 3 13 29 75 5 3 83 
			 Southend-on-Sea 40 0 9 26 74 56 3 82 
			 Thurrock 4 0 39 28 72 4 3 79 
		
	
	
		
			  Number of 16-year olds 
			   Maintained schools( 1)  Independent schools( 2)  Sixth form college  Other FE( 3)  Total  WBL  Part-time education  Total education and WBL( 4)  Population 
			 Essex 5,300 400 2,300 5,000 13,000 900 600 14,500 17,400 
			 Southend-on-Sea 800 — 200 500 1,500 100 100 1,600 2,000 
			 Thurrock 100 — 800 500 1,400 100 100 1,500 1,900 
		
	
	
		
			  Table 2 : Participation in education and training of 16 year olds by LEAs in Essex, 200 4 ,  f ull-time education 
			  Percentage  of 16-year olds 
			   Maintained schools( 1)  Independent schools( 2)  Sixth form college  Other FE( 3)  Total  WBL  Part-time education  Total education and WBL( 4) 
			 Essex 31 3 12 27 73 5 3 83 
			 Southend-on-Sea 39 0 10 26 74 6 2 82 
			 Thurrock 4 0 36 27 66 5 3 74 
		
	
	
		
			  Number of 16-year olds 
			   Maintained schools( 1)  Independent schools( 2)  Sixth form college  Other FE( 3)  Total  WBL  Part-time education  Total education and WBL( 4)  Population 
			 Essex 5,400 400 2,100 4,600 12,500 1,100 600 14,300 17,000 
			 Southend-on-Sea 800 — 200 500 1,500 100 — 1,700 2,000 
			 Thurrock 100 — 700 500 1,300 100 100 1,500 2,000 
			 1 Includes all pupils in maintained schools and maintained special schools. (2 )Includes all pupils in independent schools, non-maintained special schools, city technology colleges, academies and pupil referral units. (3) Includes all learners in General FE, tertiary and specialist colleges (e.g. agriculture colleges). (4) Total of all full-time and part-time education and WBL, less WBL provision in education institutions.

Languages: GCE A-Level

Nigel Evans: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families what proportion of students in post-16 full-time education were entered for A-level or equivalent examinations in  (a) French,  (b) German,  (c) Spanish,  (d) Mandarin Chinese,  (e) Russian and  (f) another modern foreign language in (i) Ribble Valley, (ii) Lancashire and (iii) England in each year since 1997.

Jim Knight: holding answer 26 November 2007
	The information required is as follows.
	Figures for Ribble Valley are available at only disproportionate cost.
	
		
			  Number of pupils taking GCE A levels in England and Lancashire in academic years 1997-98 to 2006-07 
			   England 
			   1998  1999  2000  2001  2002  2003  2004  2005  2006  2007 
			 French 19,629 17,774 15,240 15,393 13,599 12,904 12,480 11,963 12,190 12,173 
			 German 8,903 8,527 7,581 7,607 6,367 6,068 5,643 5,238 5,534 5,631 
			 Spanish 4,499 4,640 4,516 501 4,430 4,504 4,650 4,930 5,202 5,502 
			 Chinese 1,017 1,122 1,185 102 1,400 1,496 1,677 1,606 1,996 1,993 
			 Russian 455 460 490 442 415 485 451 547 522 623 
			
			 Welsh (2nd language) 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 1 
			 Dutch 6 18 14 32 21 24 49 73 62 69 
			 Italian 556 556 585 565 582 531 516 508 577 542 
			 Modern Greek 153 107 112 87 110 77 93 96 71 86 
			 Portuguese 96 108 118 88 125 102 115 131 141 166 
			 Arabic 0 0 0 167 188 181 218 258 259 277 
			 Bengali 86 42 41 41 37 23 28 44 38 38 
			 Gujarati 0 0 0 0 10 14 21 23 21 29 
			 Hindi 15 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			 Japanese 317 279 273 183 201 232 203 210 242 223 
			 Modern Hebrew 27 24 21 14 26 36 34 34 51 50 
			 Panjabi 139 89 118 108 50 83 75 96 134 94 
			 Polish 79 84 86 49 68 66 85 92 115 143 
			 Turkish 119 116 129 118 151 171 188 227 223 212 
			 Urdu 390 485 484 413 395 392 443 469 478 420 
			 Persian 0 0 0 0 71 86 83 120 154 147 
			 Total (other) 1,983 1,915 1,981 1,865 2,046 2,018 2,151 2,381 2,566 2,497 
			 Total (all modern languages) 36,486 34,438 30,993 30,910 28,257 27,475 27,052 26,665 28,010 28,419 
		
	
	
		
			   Lancashire 
			   1998  1999  2000  2001  2002  2003  2004  2005  2006  2007 
			 French 332 230 253 247 256 237 202 200 215 207 
			 German 128 131 117 175 132 125 115 120 119 115 
			 Spanish 82 65 76 94 79 77 62 82 99 97 
			 Chinese 9 12 22 28 35 15 10 17 23 32 
			 Russian 1 0 0 3 0 2 1 3 2 2 
			 Dutch 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 
			 Italian 1 2 1 1 0 0 3 6 10 6 
			 Modern Greek 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 
			 Portuguese 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 
			 Arabic 0 0 0 2 1 0 1 1 2 1 
			 Bengali 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 
			 Hindi 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			 Japanese 2 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 
			 Modern Hebrew 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 
			 Panjabi 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			 Polish 0 1 0 0 2 0 0 1 0 3 
			 Turkish 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			 Urdu 19 32 22 24 23 23 32 29 44 30 
			 Total (other) 22 38 23 28 27 23 36 41 58 43 
			
			 Total (all modern languages) 574 476 491 575 529 479 426 463 516 496

Mathematics: GCE A-level

David Laws: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families what plans he has to increase the number of students taking mathematics to A-level; and if he will make a statement.

Jim Knight: This year there were 53,416 entries for A-level mathematics (an increase of 3,611 since 2006} and 7,241 entries for A-level further mathematics (an increase of 725). The Government are committed to increasing the number of young people entered for A-level mathematics to 56,000 by 2014. They have put in place a strong programme of work to help achieve this which includes:
	Developing innovative key stage 3 lesson materials to engage young people with mathematics, along with appropriate teacher support. The materials will be available to schools in April 2008 for use in classrooms from September;
	Slimming down the national curriculum statutory programmes of study by expressing content in more general terms without losing breadth, depth, and challenge. This provides greater flexibility for schools and enables them to focus on key concepts. The new mathematics curriculum at key stages 3 and 4 will be introduced for first teaching from September 2008;
	Developing through the Qualifications and Curriculum Authority a second mathematics GCSE aimed at students who wish to gain a deeper appreciation of mathematics. It will be additional to the existing mathematics GCSE and will be introduced for first teaching from 2010;
	Producing a range of case studies which evidence school level factors associated with high levels of progression to post -16 mathematics;
	Commissioning a programme of support and guidance aimed at increasing the number of young people continuing their study of STEM (science, technology, engineering and mathematics) subjects post -16 by showing the wide range of careers available to those who study STEM subjects;
	Commissioning a STEM communications campaign to inform pupils, parents and others of the wide ranging and existing opportunities that are open to students when they choose to study STEM subjects and qualifications up to and post-16;
	Introducing new mathematics specifications for first teaching in September 2004. They make AS and A-level mathematics more flexible and manageable;
	Funding a network of further mathematics centres to increase the number of young people taking further mathematics A-level;
	Putting in place a number of measures to step up the recruitment, retention and retraining of mathematics teachers.

Music: Finance

Jeremy Hunt: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families pursuant to the answer of 15 November 2007,  Official Report, column 420W, on music: finance, how many local education authorities supplemented their music standards fund grants with additional spending in the last 12 months.

Jim Knight: The requested information is contained in the following table.
	
		
			  Planned net expenditure on music services (not standards fund supported)( 1)  by local authorities in England, 2007-08( 2) 
			  Local authority name  Music service (not standards fund supported)( 1, 2, 3)  (£) 
			 England 29,790,000 
			   
			 Barking and Dagenham 484,000 
			 Barnet 0 
			 Barnsley 253,000 
			 Bath and North East Somerset 92,000 
			 Bedfordshire 835,000 
			 Bexley 182,000 
			 Birmingham 313,000 
			 Blackburn and Darwen 0 
			 Blackpool 0 
			 Bolton 80,000 
			 Bournemouth 74,000 
			 Bracknell Forest 37,000 
			 Bradford 0 
			 Brent 101,000 
			 Brighton and Hove 399,000 
			 Bromley 446,000 
			 Buckinghamshire 467,000 
			 Bury 0 
			 Calderdale 125,000 
			 Cambridgeshire 151,000 
			 Camden 125,000 
			 Cheshire 242,000 
			 City of Bristol 86,000 
			 City of Kingston-upon-Hull 462,000 
			 City of London 50,000 
			 Cornwall 254,000 
			 Coventry 792,000 
			 Croydon 250,000 
			 Cumbria 74,000 
			 Darlington 122,000 
			 Derby 11,000 
			 Derbyshire 89,000 
			 Devon 76,000 
			 Doncaster 118,000 
			 Dorset 187,000 
			 Dudley 997,000 
			 Durham 410,000 
			 Ealing 0 
			 East Riding of Yorkshire 395,000 
			 East Sussex 219,000 
			 Enfield 390,000 
			 Essex 805,000 
			 Gateshead 67,000 
			 Gloucestershire 60,000 
			 Greenwich 67,000 
			 Hackney 101,000 
			 Halton 0 
			 Hammersmith and Fulham 0 
			 Hampshire 779,000 
			 Haringey 153,000 
			 Harrow 340,000 
			 Hartlepool 0 
			 Havering 241,000 
			 Herefordshire 0 
			 Hertfordshire 1,486,000 
			 Hillingdon 429,000 
			 Hounslow 60,000 
			 Isle of Wight 137,000 
			 Isles of Scilly 0 
			 Islington 0 
			 Kensington and Chelsea 29,000 
			 Kent 414,000 
			 Kingston upon Thames 134,000 
			 Kirklees 0 
			 Knowsley 249,000 
			 Lambeth 0 
			 Lancashire 35,000 
			 Leeds 612,000 
			 Leicester 0 
			 Leicestershire 0 
			 Lewisham 101,000 
			 Lincolnshire 638,000 
			 Liverpool (129,000) 
			 Luton 214,000 
			 Manchester 0 
			 Medway 0 
			 Merton 70,000 
			 Middlesbrough 0 
			 Milton Keynes 510,000 
			 Newcastle upon Tyne 12,000 
			 Newham 0 
			 Norfolk 151,000 
			 North East Lincolnshire 0 
			 North Lincolnshire 20,000 
			 North Somerset 103,000 
			 North Tyneside 0 
			 North Yorkshire 553,000 
			 Northamptonshire 254,000 
			 Northumberland 0 
			 Nottingham City 11,000 
			 Nottinghamshire 1,247,000 
			 Oldham 185,000 
			 Oxfordshire 988,000 
			 Peterborough 0 
			 Plymouth 0 
			 Poole 52,000 
			 Portsmouth 27,000 
			 Reading 0 
			 Redbridge 867,000 
			 Redcar and Cleveland 0 
			 Richmond upon Thames 98,000 
			 Rochdale 175,000 
			 Rotherham 0 
			 Rutland 0 
			 Salford 577,000 
			 Sandwell 554,000 
			 Sefton 290,000 
			 Sheffield 232,000 
			 Shropshire 269,000 
			 Slough 0 
			 Solihull 456,000 
			 Somerset 49,000 
			 South Gloucestershire 5,000 
			 South Tyneside 117,000 
			 Southampton 603,000 
			 Southend 0 
			 Southwark 0 
			 St. Helens 0 
			 Staffordshire 200,000 
			 Stockport 4,000 
			 Stockton-on-Tees 113,000 
			 Stoke on Trent 183,000 
			 Suffolk 360,000 
			 Sunderland 59,000 
			 Surrey 223,000 
			 Sutton 56,000 
			 Swindon 3,000 
			 Tameside 0 
			 Telford and Wrekin 49,000 
			 Thurrock 70,000 
			 Torbay 0 
			 Tower Hamlets 0 
			 Trafford 229,000 
			 Wakefield 127,000 
			 Walsall 357,000 
			 Waltham Forest 246,000 
			 Wandsworth 0 
			 Warrington 0 
			 Warwickshire 1,307,000 
			 West Berkshire 0 
			 West Sussex 475,000 
			 Westminster 0 
			 Wigan 0 
			 Wiltshire 0 
			 Windsor and Maidenhead 48,000 
			 Wirral 163,000 
			 Wokingham 58,000 
			 Wolverhampton 92,000 
			 Worcestershire 295,000 
			 York 189,000 
			 (1) Includes planned expenditure (not standards fund supported) on the provision of music tuition or other activities which provide opportunities for pupils to enhance their experience of music. This is drawn from local authorities' 2007-08 section 52 Budget Statements (Table 1 line 2.4.11) submitted to the DCSF (formally DfES). (2) 2007-08 figures is subject to change by the local authority. (3) Figures are rounded to the nearest £1,000 and may not sum due to rounding.  Note: Cash term figures as reported by local authorities as at 26 November 2007.

Schools: Admissions

Stewart Jackson: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families what assessment he has made of the effect of inward migration on schools in Peterborough constituency over the last 10 years.

Jim Knight: Local authorities are responsible for balancing the demand and supply of school places in their area. They have a duty to ensure there are sufficient school places, the needs of the local community are served and good quality education is provided in a cost-effective way.
	The Department collects information from each local authority on the number of school places and the number of pupils on roll via an annual survey. Local authorities also provide area-wide forecasts of pupil numbers at primary and secondary levels. The earliest data available is for 2003 and the most recent is for 2007.
	The following table shows the number of school places, pupil numbers and the level of surplus places in Peterborough for the past five years. The local authority's forecasts of pupil numbers for the next five years (primary) and seven years (secondary) do not show a significant increase in pupil numbers.
	
		
			   2003  2004  2005  2006  2007 
			  Primary  
			 Capacity(1) 18,014 17,553 17,248 17,267 17,374 
			 NOR(2) 15,339 15,295 15,176 15,064 15,065 
			 Surplus(3) 2,756 2,299 2,276 2,257 2,309 
			   
			  Secondary  
			 Capacity(1) 14,878 14,875 14,875 15,313 15,472 
			 NOR(2) 12,980 12,838 12,925 13,183 13,187 
			 Surplus(3) 1,898 2,037 1,958 2,210 2,285 
			 (1) Capacity is the number of school places as at January.  (2) NOR relates to the number of pupils on role as at January.  (3 )Surplus relates to the difference between the capacity of a school and the number of pupils on roll.

Schools: Arson

Tom Brake: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families what estimate he has made of the cost of arson in schools in each of the last five years, broken down by  (a) region and  (b) local education authority.

Parmjit Dhanda: I have been asked to reply.
	The latest data available from my Department is for the year 2005. The following tables shows the cost of arson in schools by English region and by fire and rescue authority using my Department's most recent economic costs of fire model (2004) to estimate the costs of fire in schools for the period 2001-05. My Department does not collect data on arson by local education authority.
	
		
			   £ 
			  Region ( 1) 2001 ( 1) 2002 ( 1) 2003 ( 1) 2004 ( 1) 2005 
			 East 1,864,800 1,531,800 2,164,500 2,297,700 1,798,200 
			 East Midlands 1,665,000 1,698,300 1,831,500 2,031,300 832,500 
			 London 2,997,000 732,600 1,798,200 1,798,200 1,198,800 
			 North-east 1,731,600 2,897,100 1,265,400 965,700 865,800 
			 North-west 6,826,500 5,094,900 5,494,500 5,328,000 3,996,000 
			 South-east 3,230,100 2,331,000 3,330,000 3,762,900 2,097,900 
			 South-west 2,364,300 1,465,200 1,798,200 1,065,600 732,600 
			 West Midlands 2,630,700 2,164,500 2,763,900 2,231,100 2,364,300 
			 Yorkshire and Humberside 5,161,500 4,162,500 4,662,000 3,096,900 2,331,000 
			 (1) Cost of arson based on average cost of school fire of £33,000. 
		
	
	
		
			  £ 
			  Fire and rescue authority ( 1) 2001 ( 1) 2002 ( 1) 2003 ( 1) 2004 ( 1) 2005 
			 Avon 566,100 666,000 965,700 399,600 233,100 
			 Bedfordshire 333,000 566,100 399,600 266,400 66,600 
			 Berkshire 66,600 399,600 266,400 0 133,200 
			 Buckinghamshire 299,700 0 166,500 632,700 333,000 
			 Cambridgeshire 0 133,200 499,500 399,600 233,100 
			 Cheshire 333,000 566,100 366,300 166,500 333,000 
			 Cleveland 166,500 1,298,700 166,500 33,300 99,900 
			 Cornwall 0 0 199,800 233,100 33,300 
			 Cumbria 233,100 99,900 166,500 233,100 133,200 
			 Derbyshire 466,200 466,200 599,400 266,400 233,100 
			 Devon 699,300 333,000 199,800 99,900 99,900 
			 Dorset 432,900 0 133,200 99,900 166,500 
			 Durham 333,000 432,900 166,500 166,500 199,800 
			 East Sussex 532,800 0 299,700 765,900 299,700 
			 Essex 499,500 166,500 732,600 399,600 466,200 
			 Gloucestershire 166,500 166,500 299,700 0 0 
			 Greater London 2,997,000 732,600 1,798,200 1,798,200 1,198,800 
			 Greater Manchester 3,363,300 2,597,400 2,530,800 2,164,500 1,631,700 
			 Hampshire 799,200 466,200 832,500 765,900 199,800 
			 Hereford and Worcester 166,500 133,200 166,500 299,700 233,100 
			 Hertfordshire 266,400 499,500 199,800 333,000 266,400 
			 Humberside 1,065,600 865,800 1,431,900 832,500 432,900 
			 Isle of Wight 0 0 0 0 33,300 
			 Isles of Scilly 0 0 0 0 0 
			 Kent 566,100 499,500 566,100 299,700 366,300 
			 Lancashire 1,398,600 899,100 965,700 1,298,700 932,400 
			 Leicestershire 699,300 532,800 632,700 532,800 233,100 
			 Lincolnshire 0 66,600 133,200 233,100 33,300 
			 Merseyside 1,498,500 932,400 1,465,200 1,465,200 965,700 
			 Norfolk 133,200 133,200 166,500 133,200 233,100 
			 North Yorkshire 166,500 166,500 166,500 199,800 266,400 
			 Northamptonshire 366,300 33,300 166,500 466,200 466,200 
			 Northumberland 166,500 0 266,400 0 66,600 
			 Nottinghamshire 499,500 632,700 466,200 999,000 333,000 
			 Oxfordshire 366,300 199,800 399,600 299,700 66,600 
			 Shropshire 0 0 299,700 566,100 166,500 
			 Somerset 499,500 299,700 0 233,100 199,800 
			 South Yorkshire 1,431,900 932,400 799,200 666,000 599,400 
			 Staffordshire 632,700 299,700 432,900 199,800 499,500 
			 Suffolk 266,400 0 0 299,700 66,600 
			 Surrey 266,400 0 466,200 233,100 199,800 
			 Tyne and Wear 1,065,600 1,165,500 666,000 765,900 499,500 
			 Warwickshire 166,500 333,000 266,400 233,100 233,100 
			 West Midlands 1,665,000 1,398,600 1,598,400 932,400 1,232,100 
			 West Sussex 0 732,600 333,000 765,900 299,700 
			 West Yorkshire 2,497,500 2,197,800 2,264,400 1,398,600 1,032,300 
			 Wiltshire 333,000 33,300 0 0 166,500 
			 (1) Cost of arson based on average cost of school fire of £33,000.

Schools: Expenditure

Andrew Rosindell: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families 
	(1)  how much has been allocated per child in  (a) primary and  (b) secondary schools in the (i) Romford, (ii) Hornchurch and (iii) Upminster constituencies in each of the last five years;
	(2)  what the average Government spending per child in  (a) primary and  (b) secondary schools is (i) in Romford and (ii) in London;

Jim Knight: The Department allocates education funding to local authorities so the requested information for Romford, Hornchurch and Upminster constituencies is not available. The per pupil revenue funding figures for years 2003-04 to 2005-06 for Havering local authority are as follows:
	
		
			   2003-04  2004-05  2005-06 
			 Primary (pupils aged 3-10) 3,541 3,645 3,828 
			 Secondary (pupils aged 11-15) 4,509 4,715 4,875 
			 Total (pupils aged 3-19) 4,033 4,192 4,370 
			  Notes: 1. Price Base: Real terms at 2006-07 prices, based on GDP deflators as at 26 September 2007. 2. Figures reflect relevant sub-blocks of education formula spending (EFS) settlements and include the pensions transfer to EFS. 3. Total funding also includes all revenue grants in DFES departmental expenditure limits relevant to pupils aged 3-19 and exclude education maintenance allowances (EMAs) and grants not allocated at LEA level. 4. The pupil numbers used to convert £ million figures to £ per pupil are those underlying the EFS settlement calculations. 5. Status: Some of the grant allocations have not been finalised. If these do change, the effect on the funding figures is expected to be minimal. 
		
	
	The revenue per pupil figures shown in the table below are taken from the Dedicated Schools Grant (DSG) which was introduced in April 2006. They are not comparable with those for the years 2003-04 to 2005-06 because the introduction of the DSG in 2006-07 fundamentally changed how local authorities are funded.
	The 2003-04 to 2005-06 figures are based on education formula spending (EFS) which formed the education part of the Local Government Finance Settlement, plus various grants. The DSG is based on planned spend. In addition, the DSG has a different coverage to EFS, which comprises a schools block and an LEA block (to cover LEA central functions) whereas DSG only covers the school block. LEA block items are still funded through DCLG's Local Government Finance Settlement but education items cannot be separately identified. Consequently, there is a break in the Department's time series as the two sets of data are not comparable.
	As the DSG is a mechanism for distributing funding, a split between primary and secondary schools split is not available.
	The per pupil revenue funding figures for years 2006-07 to 2007-08 for Havering local authority and the London averages are as follows:
	
		
			   DSG plus grants 
			   2006-07  2007-08 
			 Havering 4,224 4,374 
			 London 5,067 5,253 
			  Notes: 1. The revenue funding per pupil figures only run to 2005-06 because we cannot provide a consistent time series beyond that year as the introduction of the Dedicated Schools Grant (DSG) in 2006-07 fundamentally changed how local authorities are funded. The 2003-04 to 2005-06 figures are based on education formula spending (EFS) which formed the education part of the Local Government Finance Settlement, plus various grants. This was an assessment of what local authorities needed to fund education rather than what they spent. In 2006-07 funding for schools changed with the introduction of the DSG which is based largely on an authority's previous spending. 2. In addition, DSG has a different coverage to EFS: EFS comprised a schools block and an LEA block (to cover LEA central functions) whereas DSG only covers the school block. LEA block items are still funded through DCLG's Local Government Finance Settlement but education items cannot be separately identified. This means we have a break in our time series as the two sets of data are not comparable, an alternative time series is currently under development. 3. Price Base: Real terms at 2006-07 prices, based on GDP deflators as at 26 September 2007. 4. Some of the grant allocations have not been finalised. If these do change, the effect on the funding figures is expected to be minimal.

Schools: Intimidation

Jamie Reed: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families 
	(1)  in which 20  (a) local education authorities and  (b) schools the most incidences of bullying occurred in the latest period for which figures are available;
	(2)  how many reported cases of bullying there were in schools in the last year for which records are available;
	(3)  what steps his Department is taking to eradicate bullying in schools;
	(4)  what assessment his Department has made of the effect of bullying upon educational attainment in schools;
	(5)  what assessment he has made of the correlation between incidence of bullying and levels of school performance;
	(6)  what steps his Department plans to take to involve trades unions and employers in anti-bullying initiatives.

Kevin Brennan: The information is as follows:
	 169492 and 169616
	We are unable to provide definitive figures for numbers of bullying incidents at school as we do not collect this data centrally.
	However, tables showing the number of permanent and fixed period exclusions in each local authority area by reason for exclusion have been placed in the Library. This includes a category relating to bullying.
	 169613
	The Government are spending around £1.8 million this year supporting schools to meet their legal obligations to prevent all forms of bullying among pupils. Earlier this year we issued comprehensive new guidance to schools on how to prevent and tackle bullying called 'Safe to Learn: Embedding anti-bullying work in schools'. It includes practical advice for schools on how to develop robust anti-bullying policies and embed effective practice, and specific advice on tackling cyberbullying and homophobic bullying. This suite of guidance links to the guidance we produced last year for schools on 'Bullying Around Race Religion and Culture', and we will publish further guidance in the spring on how tackle the bullying of children with special educational needs and disabilities.
	In the Education and Inspections Act 2006, we introduced new powers for head teachers and school staff to ensure proper discipline both inside and outside schools. The Act empowers school staff to impose disciplinary penalties for bad behaviour, and to regulate the behaviour of pupils when they are off the school site.
	We fund a number of voluntary organisations including: the Anti-Bullying Alliance who provide support and training for local authorities and schools on anti-bullying work; ChildLine in Partnership with Schools (CHIPS) who run peer mentoring schemes on behalf of the Department; and ParentLine Plus who provide advice and support for the parents of children and young people who are being bullied. We are working with the Cyberbullying Taskforce to take forward a comprehensive programme of work to tackle cyberbullying and have launched an online digital campaign targeted at children and young people. We are working with the national strategies' regional advisers to embed effective anti-bullying practice on the ground, and to work with identified schools to support and challenge them in improving their anti-bullying policies and strategies.
	In anti-bullying week we announced that we would be providing £3 million over the next two years to run peer mentoring pilots. We have also commissioned Childnet International to produce a resource pack to provide school staff with practical information and advice on how to tackle cyberbullying, and how best to introduce the topic in the classroom.
	 169494 and 169494
	The Department has not commissioned any research which compares incidents of bullying with levels of school performance or educational attainment. However, we are aware that there is research evidence to suggest bullying impacts on educational attainment and attendance. We have made clear in our published guidance that providing a safe and happy learning environment is integral to achieving the wider objectives of school improvement, raising achievement and attendance, promoting equality and diversity as well as ensuring the welfare of all members of the school community.
	 169482
	The Department consulted with all the major school staff unions in drawing up the Safe to Learn comprehensive anti-bullying guidance for schools, and its constituent elements covering cyberbullying and homophobic bullying. The school staff unions are also represented on the Department's Cyberbullying Taskforce, which brings together representatives of school staff, children's charities and the new technology providers to discuss strategies for addressing and preventing cyberbullying. There are no plans at this stage to involve employers in such discussions.

Schools: Teaching Methods

Nick Gibb: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families what guidance his Department has issued on the use of setting in schools; and when such guidance was issued.

Jim Knight: In September 2006 we published 'Grouping Pupils for Success' (publication reference DfES03945-2006DWO-EN). This is a suite of guidance documents for primary and secondary school leaders and subject leaders/co-coordinators, designed to encourage effective strategies for grouping and setting. The guidance was published and promoted through the National Strategies and is available to all schools from:
	www.standards.dcsf.gov.uk.
	This guidance is based on independent research, commissioned by the Department and published in two phases. In September 2007 we published 'Effective Teaching and Learning for Pupils in Low Attaining Groups' (reference DCSF-RR011/DCSF-RB011), a fieldwork report. This built on research published in September 2006 entitled 'Pupil Grouping Strategies and Practices at Key Stage 2 and 3' (reference RR796/RB796). These reports are available from our research gateway at:
	www.dcsf.gov.uk/research.

Science: GCE A-Level

Phil Willis: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families how many students were entered for examination at A2 level in  (a) biology,  (b) physics,  (c) chemistry,  (d) engineering and  (e) computer science in each year since 1997.

Jim Knight: The information requested is as follows.
	
		
			  Number of 16 to 18-year-old pupils entered for selected GCE/VCE A-level subjects from 1996/97 to 2006/07 in England 
			   1996/97  1997/98  1998/99  1999/2000  2000/01 
			 Biological Sciences 47,598 48,897 47,192 46,190 44,592 
			 Chemistry 36,429 37,103 35,831 35,290 33,871 
			 Physics 28,777 29,672 29,552 28,191 28,031 
			 Computer Studies 10,118 12,529 10,435 10,851 10,913 
			 Engineering (VCE)(1) — — — — — 
		
	
	
		
			   2001/02  2002/03  2003/04  2004/05  2005/06  2006/07( 2) 
			 Biological Sciences 45,407 43,902 44,235 45,662 46,624 46,916 
			 Chemistry 32,324 31,065 32,130 33,164 34,534 35,157 
			 Physics 27,860 26,278 24,606 24,094 23,657 23,973 
			 Computer Studies 9,329 8,256 6,853 5,810 5,017 4,654 
			 Engineering (VCE)(1) 407 361 380 339 211 194 
			 (1) Figures for VCE examinations only available from 2001/02 onwards. The figure relating to 2006/07 includes both GCE and VCE applied examinations. (2) 2006/07 data are provisional. Schools will get the chance to amend their results as part of the data checking (process before the revised figures are published in mid January 2008.

Secondary Education: Truancy

James Brokenshire: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families what percentage of secondary school sessions were missed through unauthorised absences in the last 12 months.

Kevin Brennan: The available information is shown in the tables.
	Absence rates for secondary schools in 2006/07 are expected to be published in February 2008.
	
		
			  Maintained Secondary Schools, City Technology Colleges and Academies( 1) : Pupil Absence by Type of School, England, 2005/06 
			 Percentage of half days missed( 2) 
			   Number of day pupils of compulsory school age( 3)  Number of pupil enrolments( 4, 5)  Authorised absence  Unauthorised absence  Overall absence 
			  Maintained Secondary Schools, City Technology Colleges and Academies 2,983,040 3,056,330 6.82 1.42 8.24 
			 (1) Includes middle schools as deemed.  (2) The number of sessions missed due to authorised/unauthorised/overall absence expressed as a percentage of the total number of  possible sessions.(  3) Pupil numbers are as at January 2006. Includes pupils aged five to 15 with sole and dual (main) registration. Excludes boarders.  (4) N umber of pupil enrolments in schools between 1 September 2005 and 27 May 2006. Includes pupils on the school roll for at least on e session who are aged between five and 15, excluding boarders. Some pupils may be counted more than once (if they moved schools during the school year or are registered in more than one school). See Notes to Editors 11, 12 and 13.  (5) There were some 7,240 cases from maintained secondary schools; 20 cases from CTCs and 370 cases from academies for  whom absence data were missing. These cases have been excluded from the total number of pupil enrolments. See Notes to Editors 12.   Note: Totals may not appear to equal the sum of the component parts because numbers have been rounded to the nearest 10.   Source:  School Census. 
		
	
	
		
			  Maintained Secondary Schools, City Technology Colleges and Academies( 1) : Pupil Absence by Type of School, England, Autumn Term 2006 and Spring Term 2007 
			 Percentage of half days missed( 2) 
			   Number of day pupils of compulsory school age( 3)  Number of pupil enrolments( 4, 5)  Authorised absence  Unauthorised absence  Overall absence 
			  Maintained Secondary Schools, City Technology Colleges and Academies 2,954,940 3,016,240 6.30 1.48 7.78 
			 (1) Includes middle schools as deemed.  (2) The number of sessions missed due to authorised/unauthorised/overall absence expressed as a percentage of the total number of possible sessions.(  3) Pupil numbers are as at January 2006. Includes pupils aged five to 15 with sole and dual (main) registration.  (4) Number of pupil enrolments in schools between 1 September 2006 and 9 April 2007. Includes pupils on the school roll for at least one session who are aged between five and 15, excluding boarders. Some pupils may be counted more than once (if they moved schools during the school year or are registered in more than one school). See Notes to Editors 14 and 15.  (5) There were some 32,498 cases from primary schools; 16,470 cases from maintained secondary schools, 18 cases from CTCs and 750 cases from academies for whom absence data were missing. These cases have been excluded from the total number of pupil enrolments. See Notes to Editors 15.   Notes:  1. The overall absence rate, including both authorised and unauthorised absence for autumn term 2005 and spring term 2006.  2. Data for academies are based on 46 academies for autumn 2006 and spring 2007, 19 of which opened in autumn 2006.  3. Totals may not appear to equal the sum of the component parts because numbers have been rounded to the nearest 10.   Source:  School Census.

Teachers: Recruitment

Phil Willis: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families what the recruitment target for all forms of secondary teacher training in  (a) biology,  (b) chemistry,  (c) physics,  (d) mathematics,  (e) engineering and  (f) computer science was in each of the last 10 years.

Jim Knight: The Department sets targets for recruitment to mainstream initial teacher training and the targets for science, mathematics, design and technology, and information and communications technology (ICT) between 1998/99 and 2007/8 are shown in the following table.
	
		
			  Mainstream initial teacher training places( 1) : academic year 1998/99 to 2007/08 
			  Secondary subject  1998/99  1999/2000  2000/01  2001/02  2002/03  2003/04  2004/05  2005/06  2006/07  2007/08 
			 Science 3,050 2,390 2,690 2,810 2,850 3,225 3,225 3,225 3,225 3,225 
			 Mathematics 2,150 1,680 1,850 1,940 1,940 2,315 2,350 2,350 2,350 2,350 
			 Design and Technology2 — — — — — — 1,085 1,060 1,010 930 
			 Information and communications technology(2) — — — — — — 1,050 1,100 1,040 985 
			 (1) Includes school centred ITT but excludes employment based routes (EBR). (2) Number of places for design and technology and information and communications technology are not available before 2004/05 as these were grouped as a total technology target in these years.  Note: Places for vocational subjects in 2006/07 and 2007/08 are included with the allocation for related academic subject: Science includes places for applied science, design and technology includes both manufacturing and engineering and ICT includes applied ICT. In 2004/05, places for vocational subjects were shown separately. In 2003/04, the margin of flexibility included places for a vocational subjects pilot.  Source: DCSF. 
		
	
	The Department does not currently set targets for employment based routes initial teacher training courses. However, recruitment data for EBR ITT courses is taken into account in projecting the future required number of recruits and successful completers on each type of programme and by subject which assists in determining the targets required for mainstream ITT recruitment.

Teachers: Training

David Laws: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families what proportion of those enrolled as teacher trainees in each year since 1997 were teachers three years after enrolment.

Jim Knight: Information tracking those who enrol as teacher trainees through to them starting teaching is not held centrally.
	The following table shows the number of final year Initial Teacher Training (ITT) trainees for each academic year between 1998/99 and 2005/06 who gained Qualified Teacher Status (QTS) in their final year of training and of these the number who were known to be in a teaching post six months after gaining QTS for Mainstream Initial Teacher Training (ITT) trainees. Information is not available for 1997/98 in a consistent format.
	
		
			  Mainstream final year ITT trainees( 1) 
			  Academic year  Total number of mainstream trainees in their final year  Number of mainstream final year trainees gaining QTS( 2)  Number of final year trainees who gained QTS and are known to be in a teaching post 6 months after gaining QTS( 3, 4)  Proportion of mainstream final year trainees who  gain QTS  Proportion of mainstream final year trainees gaining QTS who are known to be in a  teaching post  six  months after gaining QTS 
			 1998/99 27,200 24,070 19,240 88 80 
			 1999/2000 24,650 21,690 17,800 88 82 
			 2000/01 25,720 22,640 18,940 88 84 
			 2001/02 26,350 23,280 19,660 88 84 
			 2002/03 28,570 25,430 20,150 89 79 
			 2003/04 30,970 27,340 21,820 88 80 
			 2004/05 31,360 27,150 21,960 87 81 
			 2005/06 31,310 27,100 22,040 87 81 
			 (1) Includes trainees from Universities and other Higher Education (HE) institutions, School Centred Initial Teacher Training (SCITT) and Open Universities (OU), but exclude Employment Based Routes (EBR). (2) Those who failed to gain QTS include those who are yet to complete their course, those who left before the end of their course, those who had their QTS withheld, those who have not taken the skills test and those with an unknown outcome. (3) Those in a teaching post six months after gaining QTS include those in maintained schools, non-maintained schools and where the sector is unknown. (4) Those who are not in a teaching post six months after gaining QTS include those who are seeking a teaching post, those who are not seeking a teaching post and those with an unknown destination.  Note: Numbers are individually rounded to the nearest 10.  Source:  TDA performance profiles 
		
	
	The following tables show the number of final year Initial Teacher Training (ITT) trainees for each academic year between 2001/02 and 2005/06 who gained Qualified Teacher Status (QTS) in their final year of training for Employment Based Routes (EBR) trainees. Information relating to the number of trainees gaining QTS through employment based routes was only collected from 2001/02 onwards and the employment status of trainees through EBR is not collected.
	
		
			  Employment Based Routes (EBR) final year ITT trainees( 1) 
			  Academic year  Total number of EBR trainees in their final year  Number of EBR final year trainees gaining QTS( 2)  Proportion of EBR final year trainees who gain QTS 
			 2001/02 2,440 2,210 91 
			 2002/03 4,030 3,670 91 
			 2003/04 4,950 4,470 90 
			 2004/05 7,220 6,600 91 
			 2005/06 6,970 6,090 87 
			 (1 )Includes trainees through Employment Based Routes (EBR) only. (2 )Those who failed to gain QTS include those who are yet to complete their course, those who left before the end of their course, those who had their QTS withheld, those who have not taken the skills test and those with an unknown outcome.  Note: Numbers are individually rounded to the nearest 10.  Source:  TDA performance profiles. 
		
	
	The following table shows the proportion of full and part-time teachers in maintained schools who were still teaching in the maintained sector three years after gaining QTS, by the year which they gained QTS.
	
		
			  Percentage of full and part-time( 1)  teachers that qualified in a particular year and were still in service in the maintained sector in England three years later 
			  Year qualified( 2)  First year in service( 3)  Percentage in full or part-time service three years later 
			 1997 1997-98 79 
			 1998 1998-99 79 
			 1999 1999-200 79 
			 2000 2000-01 80 
			 2001 2001-02 81 
			 2002 2002-03 82 
			 (1 )Teachers in part-time service are under-recorded on the DTR by between 10 and 20 per cent. and therefore these figures may be slightly underestimated. (2 )Calendar year in which the teachers qualified (3 )Financial year during which the teachers entered service.  Source:  Database of Teacher Records (DTR).

World War II: Education

Anthony Steen: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families if he will ensure that teaching of the historical fact of the Holocaust is mandatory in the school curriculum.

Jim Knight: holding answer 22 November 2007
	The National Curriculum requires pupils aged between 11 and 14 to study the Holocaust and this has not changed following the recent KS3 review where the Holocaust remains one of the very few compulsory elements of the History Curriculum. Its study is supporting by funding the Holocaust Education Trust to offer a visit to Auschwitz to two 15 to 17-year-olds from every English secondary school.

Alcoholic Drinks: Newcastle upon Tyne

Doug Henderson: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what progress has been made on tackling misuse of alcohol in the Newcastle-upon-Tyne Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust area since the introduction of the Alcohol Harm Reduction Strategy for England.

Dawn Primarolo: The Renewed Alcohol Strategy, "Safe, Sensible, Social-Next Steps in the National Alcohol Strategy, "was published on 5 June 2007. The strategy aims to:
	focus future action on reducing the types of harm that are of most concern to the public;
	reduce the crime and ill health caused by alcohol; and
	increase the public's awareness of the risks associated with excessive consumption, and how to get help.
	The North East Regional Alcohol Advisory Group is responsible for bringing together agencies and individuals from across the region with an interest in the alcohol agenda. It has so far examined the potentially harmful impact of alcohol misuse upon local communities and is taking steps to tackle key issues around the treatment, prevention and control of alcohol-related problems.
	The "North East Alcohol Misuse Statement of Priorities", which was published in February 2007, will support and compliment initiatives carried out at a local level and add value, and influence events, at a regional level.

Bone Diseases: Medical Treatments

Andrew George: To ask the Secretary of State for Health when he expects anti-TNF treatments to be available to patients with ankylosing spondylitis.

Ann Keen: The National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) are currently producing a technology appraisal on the use of adalimumab, etanercept and infliximab for the treatment of ankylosing spondylitis. This appraisal is expected to published in December 2007. Primary care trusts have a legal obligation to provide funding for treatments recommended by NICE within three months of the guidance being issued.
	Funding for licensed treatments should not be withheld because of lack of guidance from NICE. In December 2006, we issued good practice guidance which asks national health service bodies to continue with local arrangements for the managed introduction of new technologies where guidance from NICE is not available at the time the treatment or technology first became available.

Departmental ICT

Gordon Banks: To ask the Secretary of State for Health which manufacturers' software is used in his Department.

Ben Bradshaw: The manufacturers whose software is in use across the Department are:
	Adobe;
	Computer Associates;
	I beg to move,;
	Microsoft;
	Oracle;
	Pointsec Mobile Technologies;
	Winzip.
	Other manufacturers whose software is used by subsections of the Department in support of key operation and business functions are:
	Bluecoat;
	BMC Software;
	Citrix;
	Compuware;
	Designer Appliances;
	Intergralis;
	ISI;
	MASS Information Systems;
	Mercury UK;
	Mindjet;
	MSRA;
	Nessoft LLC;
	Nuance;
	Quark;
	Quest Software (UK);
	Real Asset Management;
	RIM;
	SAS Sostware;
	Sirsi;
	Software Spectrum UK;
	SPSS (UK);
	Sun Microsystems;
	Symantec;
	Team Studio Europe;
	VeriSign UK;
	Veritas;
	Vmware;
	Webabacus;
	Webtrends.

Human Embryo Experiments

David Amess: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many human embryos were created specifically for the purposes of research in each year since the passage of the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 1990.

Dawn Primarolo: The Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) has informed me that data on the number of embryos created specifically for research purposes was not collected before 1999. Since then, the HFEA's register indicates that only two embryos were created specifically for research purposes.

Speech Impaired: Disability Aids

Mark Harper: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what discussions his Department has had with  (a) the Department for Communities and Local Government and  (b) the Department for Work and Pensions on (i) funding for and (ii) provision of alternative and augmentative communication aids; and what (1) response he has made and (2) steps he has taken in response to the Prime Minister's Strategy Unit report on the life chances of disabled people in relation to the provision of such aids.

Ivan Lewis: The Department has not made any such estimates or assessments and has not issued guidance.
	It is the responsibility of local health and social care organisations to prioritise and allocate funding for communication aids based on their assessment of the needs of their local populations. To support this process the Government recently announced, through the comprehensive spending review, that local authority funding will increase by £2.6 billion by 2010-11.
	Recommendation 5.6 of the Prime Ministers' Strategy Unit report "Improving the Life Chances of Disabled people", focuses on the provision of community equipment, communication aids and wheelchairs for children. As part of the process of addressing this recommendation the Department launched the Transforming Community Equipment and Wheelchair Services programme in June 2006.
	In addition, the Department, is working closely with the Department for Children, Schools and Families to support the Bercow Review. The Bercow Review is currently reviewing services for children and young people with speech, language and communication needs with the aim of producing a report in the summer of 2008.

Capital Gains Tax

Daniel Kawczynski: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer 
	(1)  if he will make an assessment of the likely effects of increasing the capital gains tax rate to 18 per cent. from April 2008 in relation to business assets held for at least two years on  (a) long-term investment,  (b) entrepreneurial risk-taking and  (c) numbers of small businesses being established in England;
	(2)  what assessment he has made of the likely effects of equalising the capital gains tax rates of long-term business assets and personal investments in shares and property on  (a) propensity to invest and  (b) business optimism within the small business sector; and if he will make a statement;
	(3)  if he will reconsider his decision to increase the capital gains tax rate on business assets held for at least two years from 10 per cent. to 18 per cent. from April 2008;
	(4)  if he will retain the 10 per cent. taper relief on business assets held for at least two years.

Jane Kennedy: The Government consider a range of factors when formulating tax policy and keep all aspects of tax policy under review.
	The Government believe that it is right to simplify the capital gains tax rules and is working with interested groups to listen to their views on a number of issues. The Chancellor will report to Parliament on his final proposals in due course.

Chad: Peacekeeping Operations

Keith Simpson: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs 
	(1)  what  (a) equipment and  (b) personnel non-EU countries have pledged to the EU peacekeeping mission to Chad and the Central African Republic;
	(2)  what representations the Government have  (a) made and  (b) received on numbers of helicopters available for the EU peacekeeping mission to Chad and the Central African Republic; and if he will make a statement;
	(3)  what assessment he has made of whether the EU peacekeeping mission to Chad and the Central African Republic will be deployed by December; and if he will make a statement.

Jim Murphy: The Government strongly support the EU peacekeeping mission and is actively engaged in finding an effective and lasting solution to the wider problems faced in the Chad/Darfur region. The 'force generation' process for the EU military force (EUFOR) is currently under way. We have made clear to the EU and to partners bilaterally that, due to other operational commitments, the UK contribution to the force will not include helicopters. A number of non-EU member states have shown strong interest in participation, but there have been no formal offers of assistance to date. Progressive deployment will begin once force generation and other necessary preparations are complete—EUFOR is currently expected to reach its initial operating capacity in early 2008.

Haider Samad

Adam Holloway: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what representations he has received on the case of Haider Samad; and if he will make a statement.

Meg Munn: I refer the hon. Member to the reply I gave him today (UIN 164481).

Haider Samad

Adam Holloway: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what discussions officials in his Department have had with officials in the Ministry of Defence on the case of Haider Samad.

Meg Munn: The hon. Member has received a briefing on this issue from a Foreign and Commonwealth Office official.